Netanyahu’s Moves Spark Debate on Intentions

Rightist Israelis in Tel Aviv threw shoes and eggs at a poster of President Obama on Monday to protest pressure to halt Jewish settlement-building.Credit
David Buimovitch/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

JERUSALEM — An offer on Monday by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel to freeze West Bank Jewish settlements in exchange for Palestinian recognition of Israel as a Jewish state — instantly rejected by the Palestinians — was the latest complex maneuver engendering debate about his intentions.

The offer, made in a speech at the opening of the fall session of Parliament, was aimed either at keeping talks with the Palestinians alive and his right-wing coalition partners in check, or at seeking to shift the burden of failure to the Palestinians and escape blame should the talks wither and die.

As part of a flurry of initiatives favored by Israel’s right that began Sunday, Mr. Netanyahu backed a measure that requires non-Jewish immigrants to take a loyalty oath to Israel as a Jewish and democratic state before they can become citizens. On Monday his government supported a bill that would require a national referendum before any territory could be yielded in a peace deal.

“The last few days clearly are disturbing as to which direction all this is going,” Isaac Herzog, Israel’s welfare minister, who is from the Labor Party, said in a telephone interview. “It may all be in preparation for the big peace step, or it may be a political maneuver to regain control of the right.”

Mr. Netanyahu is facing particular competition on the right from his foreign minister, Avigdor Lieberman, who has made a loyalty oath for Arabs a central part of his political appeal to Jewish supporters and said there will be no peace with the Palestinians for at least a generation.

But Mr. Netanyahu also has to contend with American and other international pressure to resume a construction freeze on West Bank Jewish settlements. Last Friday, the Arab League backed a Palestinian vow not to return to direct American-sponsored talks without a full settlement-construction freeze. It gave the Obama administration another month to come up with a way to save the negotiations.

In his parliamentary speech, Mr. Netanyahu mentioned that he was considering American proposals. He did not specify them, but they are known to include security guarantees and military hardware in exchange for a freeze extension of two to three months.

But Mr. Netanyahu said recognition of Israel as a Jewish state would be enough for now.

“If the Palestinian leadership will say unequivocally to its people that it recognizes Israel as the homeland of the Jewish people, I will be ready to convene my government and request a further suspension of construction for a fixed period,” he said, referring to the expired 10-month construction moratorium.

Nabil Abu Rudeineh, a spokesman and aide close to President Mahmoud Abbas of the Palestinian Authority, said the Palestinians had long ago recognized Israel and would not engage in defining its character or ethnicity.

“There is no connection between settlement building and Israel’s identity,” Mr. Abu Rudeineh said in a telephone interview. “A return to direct negotiations must be accompanied by a total freeze on settlement building. That has been our clear position. The issue of Israel’s Jewishness has nothing to do with it.”

For the Palestinians, defining Israel as a Jewish state means acknowledging that Palestinian refugees would not be permitted back to their homes in what is today Israel, a concession they are not willing to make in advance. It also raises questions about the status of Israeli Arabs.

Photo

Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu offered the Palestinians a new freeze on building in settlements if they recognize Israel as a Jewish state.Credit
Baz Ratner/Reuters

Earlier on Monday, Mr. Netanyahu’s government backed a bill requiring that a national referendum be held before any territory could be yielded in a peace deal, a move seen as easing the right’s objection to a freeze extension but substantially complicating a deal later on.

The bill stipulates that any land negotiated away, including the Golan Heights and East Jerusalem, would require approval by a parliamentary majority followed by a full popular referendum. If a supermajority in the Parliament — 80 of 120 members — accepted the land deal, the referendum would be optional.

Sponsored by a member of Mr. Netanyahu’s Likud Party, the bill passed a first reading last year but had been blocked by the government since. Now, with the backing of the ministerial committee on legislation, it heads to second and third readings and likely passage.

An error has occurred. Please try again later.

You are already subscribed to this email.

While this step could be to satisfy his right flank — like Sunday’s approval of the loyalty oath for new citizens — in advance of a concession to the Palestinians, it could also complicate matters. Requiring non-Jews to vow loyalty to a Jewish state and putting territorial withdrawal to a referendum could damage the peace process. The first would raise tensions, and the second would submit painful, unpopular decisions to a popular test.

“He has to strengthen his coalition,” said Efraim Inbar, a political scientist at Bar-Ilan University, speaking of the referendum bill. “It’s just like with the loyalty oath. It allows him to say, ‘No matter what I give up, I have to go to a referendum afterwards.’ ”

Danny Danon, a leader of the right wing of Likud, said in a telephone interview that while he generally did not favor referendums, he was in favor of this bill because it would make it harder to give up land and would reduce the chances of the creation of a Palestinian state.

“Anything that adds another barrier to the prime minister seeking to give away land is a good thing,” Mr. Danon said.

Both East Jerusalem and the Golan were officially annexed by Israel through parliamentary votes, so by Israeli law they count as Israeli territory. That is not true of the West Bank, which the Palestinians want as their future state and where Israel has settled more than 300,000 Jewish citizens.

But Israel is expected in any peace deal to hold on to some settlement blocks and to give over to the Palestinians parcels of its own land in exchange. Under those circumstances, the bill in question would seem also to require approval of such an exchange by referendum.

The Palestinians watched the referendum discussion with unease, but acknowledged that they, too, were considering such a step.

“We have these thoughts on our side as well,” said Ghassan Katib, a spokesman for the Palestinian Authority. “But they are being asked to give up territory that they are controlling illegally. Nonetheless, although we fear this will make the deal more difficult, it is their internal matter.”

Yaron Ezrahi, a political scientist at Hebrew University, said he viewed the plan of a referendum as a kind of bulletproof vest for Mr. Netanyahu to wear in his negotiations with the Palestinians and with the Obama administration.

“He is trying to soften the right as he moves forward, but he also covers himself by saying ultimately it is not up to him,” he said.

A version of this news analysis appears in print on October 12, 2010, on Page A4 of the New York edition with the headline: Netanyahu’s New Offer Doesn’t Sway Palestinians or Shed Light on His Motives. Order Reprints|Today's Paper|Subscribe